New video: "Is the Voynich Manuscript fake?"

[asteckley]

Source: "The Vinland Map Ink Is NOT Medieval",    Kenneth M. Towe,  Analytical Chemistry Vol 76/Issue 3
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Thanks for that link. It is an interesting paper.  But it does confuse the matter a bit more, since with all its discussion of inks --with and without titanium (in anatase form), and with and without iron gall components--  there is no mention or even allusion of titanium (of any compound type) being used in medieval inks. Except of course with respect to Olin attempting to explain its presence with experiments trying to simulate a possible way to explain it. It suggests that the general belief of these experts  was that no kinds of titanium were being used in inks that early.

And I also cannot find any references to the use of titanium in inks (or paint) before its discovery in 1791 (or actually before ~1920).
What little I know of titanium is from my use of it for oil painting. It is the go-to for obtaining a pure white pigment -- I am not sure why that would be a desirable or intentional component for quill inks.

Regarding Rene's comment, it's true that McCrone's report only said "titanium compound",  but I don't see how it follows  that "we can be damn sure that it was NOT anatase titanium dioxide that they found".
On the contrary, since the reporters (the McCrone technicians) were likely aware of the Vinland Map's titanium anatase debacle 
AND even more surely aware that one of the Voynich Manuscript's big questions was its time of origin, it seems me that there would be just as much, if not more, reason to expect that they would go out of their way to specifically point out that it was NOT titanium anatase.